squidilix
Member
There is no need for overreaction like that but PS4 Pro/PS5 port version runs 1440p 60FPS+ on Radeon 6700 class hardware. Guess what this game require:
![]()
Console optimization doesn't exist!
There is no need for overreaction like that but PS4 Pro/PS5 port version runs 1440p 60FPS+ on Radeon 6700 class hardware. Guess what this game require:
![]()
???????
Dave Lang is the founder of Iron Galaxy, if he's saying ND did most of the development work on the game, he's 100% spot on.
Those "low res" screenshots are from 4k video in full screen.
PS4 version looks the same as PS4 Pro version and PS5 version. All of them use the same assets and only big difference is resolution. For PS5 Pro they just slapped PSSR on top.
I'm pointing quite obvious things, you are trolling with no arguments.
low resolution assets don`t suddenly become high res when the overall res rises. Old graphics still look old in high res.
Bojji is right here, from what we got to see so far the assets look untouched which makes this seem like more of a glorified performance patch than a remaster.
Also how does this need a 4080 for upscaled ps4 graphics@4k/60?
What did they even change from the PS4 version in Part II Remastered? It looks identical.
this has nothing to do with console optimizationsConsole optimization doesn't exist!
Console optimization doesn't exist!
ah you know, he's been "out of the game" for years living a close to normal life.I respect that you like it but honestly, I found so many plot holes and things that didn't make sense. The fact that Joel introduced himself to a group of strangers in the beginning of the game was so out of character and stupid. Abby has the charisma of a rock, and the fact that you have to play with woman Hulk for half of the game was an unbelievable stupid decision
I could go on about so many parts of the game that I hated but anyway, if someone enjoys the game good for them but for me the franchise is dead
Console optimization doesn't exist!
Yeah, I'm aware that as someone who has parroted talking points from CEOs like Phil Spencer for years, you don't realize that what a CEO, President, Founder, or really anyone with a financial incentive can say can be misleading but let me tell you that regardless of what ND did or what IG did (and we don't know who was responsible for what), that IG is being blamed for the final product that was released. We can observe that.
Iron Galaxy won't be working on future PS ports.
Jesus christ, you need a fking glass...horizon zero dawn is much more impressive on PS4 than last of us part 2
They said they began development in-house. They didn't say they developed the game.Naughty Dogs directly say they developed the port in-house.![]()
Iron Galaxy's founder says ND did most of the port work.![]()
No. Let's somehow shoehorn in Phil Spencer in this conversation.
Jesus Christ you are a lost cause![]()
They said they began development in-house. They didn't say they developed the game.
what have they done in the last 2+ years?
It goes to a pattern. You defending Phil Spencer parroting his statements on GamePass and now you doing the same thing here. Meanwhile, ignoring observable reality around you.
You hail TLOUP1 as some special PS5 game when it uses the same engine as TLOUP2. You're disingenuous with what you call as PS4 game and what you call a "native" PS5 game. TLOUP2 even on base PS4 "looks" better than 90% of PS5 games. The big difference is that it's running at low res and low framerate.
The fidelity mode that is native 4K does not look the same as the PS4 game running at 1080p. Saying the only big difference is resolution is laughable. The resolution IS a big difference.
One is 1080p30 and the other is 4K30... If those are identical to you, you probably need glasses.
I swear you just start arguments for the sake of having them.One is 1080p30 and the other is 4K30... If those are identical to you, you probably need glasses.
@Bojji said this: Weird that PS5 native game (part 1) has the same requirements for ultra/4k/60fps as PS4 game (Part 2) with almost no improvements...
I'm confident that no one can take you seriously.
TLOUP2 was ported to PS5. You're referring to Part 1 as a native game, despite Part 2 Remastered also being a native PS5 game rather than the original TLOUP2 on PS4 a game that ran at 1080p30 on base PS4...
You continue to be clownish.
I swear you just start arguments for the sake of having them.
And you immediately attacked him with the following:
He wonders why do both games have the same requirements for resolution and frame rate on PC when one is a remaster of a PS4 game with barely any improvements while the other is an actual PS5 game with dramatically improved assets. Then you reply one is 4K30 and the other one 1080p30. Who gives a shit? This is immaterial to the question of the PC version because the game's resolution can be changed anyway.
The question is, why does a game with PS5 graphics like TLOU Part I has the same requirements for settings, frame rate AND resolution as a game with PS4 graphics like TLOU Part II. The performance on consoles is irrelevant. TLOU Part II should have lower requirements for a given resolution and frame rate because the graphics are worse, being practically identical to the PS4 version.
Tomb Raider running 4k with SSAAx2 and Just Cause 2 4k with MSAAx4:
![]()
![]()
Both games were designed around PS3 class hardware. Does 4k resolution make them look like PS5 games?
I look forward to how a 5 tflops 8 GB RDNA GPU from 2019 runs this game at 720p low when it runs at 1080p 30 FPS on a PS4 with probably decent medium settingsI swear you just start arguments for the sake of having them.
And you immediately attacked him with the following:
He wonders why do both games have the same requirements for settings, resolution, and frame rate on PC when one is a remaster of a PS4 game with barely any improvements while the other is an actual PS5 game with dramatically improved assets. Then you reply one is 4K30 and the other one 1080p30. Who gives a shit? This is immaterial to the question of the PC version because the game's resolution can be changed anyway.
The question is, why does a game with PS5 graphics like TLOU Part I have the same requirements for settings, frame rate AND resolution as a game with PS4 graphics like TLOU Part II. The performance on consoles is irrelevant. TLOU Part II should have lower requirements for a given resolution and frame rate because the graphics are worse, being practically identical to the PS4 version.
Wait, so you think they began development in-house, made all the engine porting required from PS5 to PC but didn't actually develop the version? lmao
![]()
Celebrating the Release of The Last of Us Part I on PC || Naughty Dog
Reflections on the studio’s journey of bringing Joel and Ellie’s story to fans and new players alike on PCwww.naughtydog.com
Not a single mention if Iron Galaxy in this entire blog. Just talk about all the things Naughty Dogs did to bring the game over from PS5 to PC.
Unlike this TLoU Part 2 blog where both Iron Galaxy and Nixxess are named specifically.
Working on this Part 2 Remastered port among other things.
And in partnership with our friends at Nixxes Software and Iron Galaxy, Part II Remastered has been brought to PC with plenty of PC-centric quality-of-life features
You talk about observable reality, ignore statements from Naughty Dogs themselves and bring in unrelated consoles and services to save face.
Lost cause, man. Lost cause.
Not a single mention of IG in a blog post, but they show up every time you launch the game in the splash screens...
Why isn't IG doing this game on their own? Like Nixxes has done in the past or JetPack did for God of War? What will you say when Sony never uses IG again? That it's just a coincidence?
You think IG has been working on TLOUP2 for 2+ Years and WITH the help of Nixxes? A company who has done 5 games in 12 months?
This doesn't matter. TLOU Part II Remastered on PS5 looks worse than TLOU Part I on PS5. Why do their PC ports have the same requirements? The worse-looking game should be less demanding. That's whyWhat in your mind differentiates TLOUP2 which released in 2020 and cross gen games like Miles Morales, GT7, Ragnarok, and Forbidden West?
spiderman 2 has the same gtx 1650 requirement for 720p low 30 FPS. that is quite hilariousThis doesn't matter. TLOU Part II Remastered on PS5 looks worse than TLOU Part I on PS5. Why do their PC ports have the same requirements? The worse-looking game should be less demanding. That's whyBojji was wondering and you decided to just attack him when he brought up a valid point.
Just ultrawide and m+kb will rape without vaseline the PS5 Pro version.PC versions aren't going to be much better than running on a PS5 Pro.
I'm unable to engage in this debate without evidence. Yet to see any comparison that says so. DF even did a comparison when Part 1 was out and concluded they are more or less a match outside of resolution. Other than Sony claiming it was "built for the PS5", there isn't enough to conclude that the actual game couldn't have run on ps4 like part 2 did. And when the PC is maxing everything out to ultra, even using the console as some kind of evidence goes out the window.TLOU Part II Remastered on PS5 looks worse than TLOU Part I on PS5.
The better question you should ask is if IG was single handedly responsible for the bad port job (which it wasn't), why is Sony even bothering to commission them again?
The answer is that Sony knows IG's contribution to the port had little or nothing to do with the state it launched in.
I don't know about you, but I wouldn't hire a handyman again if he did a bad job doing work in my house once before![]()
This doesn't matter. TLOU Part II Remastered on PS5 looks worse than TLOU Part I on PS5. Why do their PC ports have the same requirements? The worse-looking game should be less demanding. That's whyBojji was wondering and you decided to just attack him when he brought up a valid point.
I'm unable to engage in this debate without evidence. Yet to see any comparison that says so. DF even did a comparison when Part 1 was out and concluded they are more or less a match outside of resolution. Other than Sony claiming it was "built for the PS5", there isn't enough to conclude that the actual game couldn't have run on ps4 like part 2 did. And when the PC is maxing everything out to ultra, even using the console as some kind of evidence goes out the window.Bojji 's claim is too superficial and hypothetical right now until there is actual evidence. What tech or assets are better on part 1 that don't exist in part 2 remastered that require a different recommended PC spec?
TLOUP2 on PS5 looks worse than TLOU P1 on PS5? That's news to me. I think they look pretty comparable. They're also two very different games.
Which hardware it was made for does not mean anything for a PC re-release. The reality is that it was made on a high end PC and ported down to target hardware. Studios have been making games with 4k textures and high quality assets for ages.The Last of Us Part 2 was made for hardware with 5GB of memory, 1.8TF GPU, slow HDD and shit mobile CPU.
The Last of Us Part 1 was made for hardware with 13GB of memory, 10TF GPU, fast SSD and decent Zen 2.
Part 2 only got resolution upgrades and very few minor tweaks going to PS4 Pro -> PS5 -> PS5 Pro. While core aspects of the graphics are the same as on base PS4.
I don't know why I have to explain this...
The Last of Us Part 2 was made for hardware with 5GB of memory, 1.8TF GPU, slow HDD and shit mobile CPU.
The Last of Us Part 1 was made for hardware with 13GB of memory, 10TF GPU, fast SSD and decent Zen 2.
Part 2 only got resolution upgrades and very few minor tweaks going to PS4 Pro -> PS5 -> PS5 Pro. While core aspects of the graphics are the same as on base PS4.
I don't know why I have to explain this...
It does.
I don't know about him but I played part 1 on ps5I can tell that you haven't played these games on PS5 hardware.
Nor do you seem to understand the limits of hardware enhancements in terms of boosting framerates/resolution, which is why I brought up the other primary cross gen AAA games Sony has put out.
All of these games run at 1080p30 on the base PS4 similarly to TLOUP2. Which system were they made for the one with the shit mobile CPU and the 1.8TF GPU or the 10 TF GPU and Zen 2 CPU?
I can tell that you haven't played these games on PS5 hardware.
Nor do you seem to understand the limits of hardware enhancements in terms of boosting framerates/resolution, which is why I brought up the other primary cross gen AAA games Sony has put out.
All of these games run at 1080p30 on the base PS4 similarly to TLOUP2. Which system were they made for the one with the shit mobile CPU and the 1.8TF GPU or the 10 TF GPU and Zen 2 CPU?
If Part 2 on PC does not look like the model on the right, I will accept your argument.Part 1 has better models and textures:
![]()
God of War on PS5 was a bit lazy for sure (not as lazy as part 2 "remaster" on PS5) but look at Horizon:
![]()
![]()
![]()
Part 1 has better models and textures:
![]()
Not only for MC, Part 2 has a lot of low res textures. I completed Part 1 on PC and most textures were quite great, I also played PS+ trial on PS5.
I'm unable to engage in this debate without evidence. Yet to see any comparison that says so. DF even did a comparison when Part 1 was out and concluded they are more or less a match outside of resolution. Other than Sony claiming it was "built for the PS5", there isn't enough to conclude that the actual game couldn't have run on ps4 like part 2 did. And when the PC is maxing everything out to ultra, even using the console as some kind of evidence goes out the window.Bojji 's claim is too superficial and hypothetical right now until there is actual evidence. What tech or assets are better on part 1 that don't exist in part 2 remastered that require a different recommended PC spec?
Part I runs significantly worse than Part II. Oliver who did the review for both said that Part I in its 4K40fps mode isn't smooth at all and is generally between 30-35fps, dropping even below 30 in intense sequences such as the service tunnel. Part II, however, runs at an almost locked 40 and only drops occasionally when there are big effects on screen and it's still in the high 30s. Otherwise, he said it runs at 40-60. Part I doesn't even sniff 60fps on PS5 as far as I'm aware.TLOUP2 on PS5 looks worse than TLOU P1 on PS5? That's news to me. I think they look pretty comparable. They're also two very different games.
He is showing in-game models after initiating photo mode (same as the DF video I posted). The left was on PS4 in-game of Part 2 and the right was in-game part 1 on Ps5. An apples-apples comparison would be to do the same on PS5 remastered (I can probably try that later today).That looks cherry picked as fuck.
![]()
This is a fair argument and suggests they pushed settings further than the ps5 could handle compared to part 2. It doesn’t, however, suggest there is a generational divide and the source material that is needed to port to PC is a generation behind and hence cannot be made to match part 1’s pc output. Like I simplified the debate earlier, if Joel’s in game model on max settings on part 2 does not look as good as part 1, I’ll concede.Part I runs significantly worse than Part II. Oliver who did the review for both said that Part I in its 4K40fps mode isn't smooth at all and is generally between 30-35fps, dropping even below 30 in intense sequences such as the service tunnel. Part II, however, runs at an almost locked 40 and only drops occasionally when there are big effects on screen and it's still in the high 30s. Otherwise, he said it runs at 40-60. Part I doesn't even sniff 60fps on PS5 as far as I'm aware.
On consoles at least, Part I is a lot more demanding. It should be the case as well on PC, so the requirements should also be higher, unless they did some extra work to improve Part II that justifies the similar requirements.
I definitely don't think there's a generational divide, but the performance difference is quite large. Realistically, if Part I requires a 4080 for 4K60 Ultra, then Part II should lower that to a 4070 Ti or so.He is showing in-game models after initiating photo mode (same as the DF video I posted). The left was on PS4 in-game of Part 2 and the right was in-game part 1 on Ps5. An apples-apples comparison would be to do the same on PS5 remastered (I can probably try that later today).
This is a fair argument and suggests they pushed settings further than the ps5 could handle compared to part 2. It doesn’t, however, suggest there is a generational divide and the source material that is needed to port to PC is a generation behind and hence cannot be made to match part 1’s pc output. Like I simplified the debate earlier, if Joel’s in game model on max settings on part 2 does not look as good as part 1, I’ll concede.
Here’s an in game shot I just took of Joel’s model in part 2 remastered on fidelity mode. No PSSR, camera edits, fancy lighting or lens effects. It’s already pretty damn close to the model on the right in terms of skin, beard, eyes, hair, shadows and textures, despite your image having better lighting conditions (mine is a single dim lamp in No return mode). If there are other assets you would like to compare, happy to do that when I get some time. I have both parts. This is your real baseline for the PC version. Not that last gen ps4 image on the left. If anything, this should look even better on PC ultra![]()
Not only for MC, Part 2 has a lot of low res textures. I completed Part 1 on PC and most textures were quite great, I also played PS+ trial on PS5.
The bolded is key. So many other dependencies as well, like how well this is optimized, which team worked on it etc. What if it’s a poor port and doesn’t even hit 4k60 on a 5090? Will part 2 suddenly be the better looking game according to the earlier hypothesis? Performance is dependent on optimization just as much as actual asset quality and tech. It’s not a meaningful debate without actual PC assets to compare. But in pursuit of facts, I’m happy to look at whatever evidence I can get my hands on from my ps5 pro. I’m curious too and 2 more weeks is a long wait!I definitely don't think there's a generational divide, but the performance difference is quite large. Realistically, if Part I requires a 4080 for 4K60 Ultra, then Part II should lower that to a 4070 Ti or so.
That's assuming those specs are accurate though, which they never are.
Here’s an in game shot I just took of Joel’s model in part 2 remastered on fidelity mode. No PSSR, camera edits, fancy lighting or lens effects. It’s already pretty damn close to the model on the right in terms of skin, beard, eyes, hair, shadows and textures, despite your image having better lighting conditions (mine is a single dim lamp in No return mode). If there are other assets you would like to compare, happy to do that when I get some time. I have both parts. This is your real baseline for the PC version. Not that last gen ps4 image on the left. If anything, this should look even better on PC ultra
![]()